Skip to main content

tv   Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace  FOX  August 7, 2016 10:00am-11:01am PDT

10:00 am
i'm chris walace. hillary clinton opens a big lead in the polls. what can donald trump do to cut into it? >> donald trump is not qualified to be president. >> she's a monster. she's actually not strong enough to be president. today a debate. newt gingrich and clinton supporter er xavier becerra. and then. >> $400 billion gets flown into iran. who could approve that? >> we don't pay ransom, we won't in the future. cash flown into iran just as hostages were being freed.
10:01 am
senator tom cotton. they both face unfavorable numbers. we'll ask the panel whether the election will be about who voters dislike more, right now on "fox news sunday." heo again from fox news in washington. it's been a remarkably rough week for drmpl, a series of self-inflicted wounds and one poll after another showing him falling behind. but on friday hillary clinton once again stirred up the controversy over her private e-mails, which is way this race between two unpopular and distrusted nominees remains competitive. joining mess to discuss the state of the campaign, former house speaker newt gingrich and xavier becerra, thank you back to "fox news sunday." >> good to be with you. >> good to be here. as donald trump has gone
10:02 am
from one misstep to another, speaker gingrich, you have been as sharp as any critic about your man. here are some of things you've been saying about him. very self-destructive, take a deep breath and learn new skills. trump is helping her to win by proving he is more unacceptable than she is. i know that you think that clinton would make a lousy president, but how close is trump to disqualifying himself? >> i don't think very close at all. first, if you look at the last few days he's gotten the messages. he came out and endorsed paul ryan which she should have done in the first place, endorsed john mccain which he should have done in the first place. he endorsed kelly ayotte. if you've never run for office, it's tricky to jump from businessman to politician frankly the biggest mistake was last week on your son. it's one thing to lie, but
10:03 am
another thin to explain apparently her brain short-circuited. as george romney can tell you using that as an excuse is very dangerous in a campaign. i think she managed to trump trump in terms of mistakes. >> that brings us to hillary clinton. congressman becerra, who has a different problem than trump, honesty. last week i asked her about the fact that fbi direct ore comey said what she had been telling the american people for a year about her private e-mails was untrue, was false. here's how she responded. >> director comey said what my answers were truffle and is consistent with what i told american people. >> and as independent fact checkers came down, here is how hillary clinton responded. >> i may have short-circuited for that, you notice, i will try to clarify, because i think
10:04 am
chris wallace and i were probably talking past each other. >> but congressman becerra, she didn't short-sick, and we didn't walk past each other. the problem was ms. clippen misrepresented what james comb yes told the american people. >> what director domie told the american people was after a thorough investigation by the fbi, that of the over 30,000 e-mails that clinton had provided there was no wrongdoing. >> he didn't say that, but that's not what i'm talking about. what he said is there was not enough ground to prosecute her. he did say she had been extremely careless and negligent, but specifically what he said was what she told the american people over the past year was wrong. >> secretary clinton said there
10:05 am
was nothing marked classified on her e-mails either sent or received. was that true? >> that's not true. >> secretary clinton said i did not e-mail classified significant to anyone on my e-mail. was that? >> there was classified e-mail. >> director comey directly contradicted what secretary clinton has been telling the american people. >> what director comey said is she had no knowledge of the so-called classified e-mail because they were not marked or not classified at the time or incorrectly marked. so he did come out and said -- you don't show that, but he came out and say -- >> they were marked and more importantly he said that there was classified material that she had e-mailed. >> but she did not know it. otherwise if there had been the intention to send classified e-mails, then fbi would have pursued this much further, so i think you're trying to make more of this than there is. >> she didn't say i didn't
10:06 am
intend to send classified material. she said that isn't what she told the american people. >> she has made it clear that looking back she would have done it differently, she did make some mistake, but never intended to send classified information over e-mails, and the fbi investigation confirms that. and so why we may want to make more of it, the fact has said we should move on and get to real important a matters of the country. >> i think you're missing the genius of her friday comment. now you can say to that mother in benghazi, no it was short-circuit. did you forget the meetings in no, it was what short circuit. it wasn't that i lied to you, i didn't remember what i was going to say. >> after 30,000 e-mails have been been disclosed, what we don't yet know is one tax return from donald trump, we don't know how his wife gained her immigration status -- >> that is not true. that is not true. >> it's time for donald trump to start providing one iota of
10:07 am
information on the tax returns, which he's never agreed to do. >> okay. first of all, we know that his wife had a green card before she met him. she came here -- >> how did she get the green card? >> shall he came here legally. >> how did she get it. >> she didn't know donald trump. >> before she came to work. >> this is the only immigrant in america you're worried about. i think it's amazing the one person you decide to pick on happens to the the wife of donald trump. >> it's amazing that the immigrant basher -- >> first of all, i'm nthe immigrant basher, he just likes is immigrants to be legal. >> i'm the son of immigrants, but what does concern me is when some guy goes out and bashes immigrant, not only undocumented, but legal immigrants and won't explain house his wife -- >> i think we have made the
10:08 am
point. let's turn to the economy, kind of a big issue. here is what trump says about his plan. >> we're going to cut our taxes for the middle class. we're going to cut our taxes for business. we're going to have massive dollars pouring into this country, and we're going to create jobs like we have never seen before. >> but speaker gingrich, trump would cut taxes $9.5 trillion over the next decade, most of it going to top earners, and adds $11.2 trillion to the debt with unspecified spending cuts. mr. speaker, his numbers don't add up. >> of course not. i hi historically no candidate's numbers add up, particularly in the media. >> you're saying his numbers -- >> i'm going to have to quote you on that one, newt. >> i said all candidates. if you open up america's energy and mining opportunities there's
10:09 am
at least $7 trillion in potential additional revenue just from making it easier to develop our own energy and only mental resources. there are a number of steps to take to dramatically accelerate the economy. if you dramatically -- you have an explosion of small business getting created. in a period of economic growth such as the reagan era, you do in fact raise a tremendous amount of revenue. >> congressman becerra, you can responsible, but i also -- >> breathtaking. breathtaking. >> go ahead. >> the plan you just outlined, which sentence money mostly to folks at the top has been scored to probably look about 3.5 million jobs broadband senator mccain's former economist. it's also clear that increasing debt, donald trump really meant he was the, quote, king of debt. this is a guy who thinks -- and his quote was wages are too high. the problem in the economy isn't
10:10 am
that wages are too high. we've seen jobs created in the last six years or so. the problem has been americans haven't seen their wages go up. so salaries -- >> but president obama has been the president for the last eight years. you make it sound like somebody else is in charge. >> what's not good is we have to see americans' wages go up. that's what we have to work on. >> the jobs aren't good. you're not getting manufacturing back. you're again bartending jobs and service jobs. >> because he outsources jobs -- let me ask about clinton's numbers. they do add up. she would raise taxes $1.2 trillion, a trillion over ten years, most of that on the rich. even with big new spending programs adding only about 250 million to the debt, but what it is basically is more of the obama plan. here's that discussion. you're offering more government programs -- >> well, but that's --
10:11 am
>> more entitlements are mo more taxes -- >> no. >> -- more tax penaltyings and credits. >> let's unpack that. what i'm offer is the biggest job creation program since world war ii. >> but it's infrastructure. that's what obama did. >> but he didn't get to do enough. >> the problem with the weakest recoveries since 1949 is that obama didn't get to do enough? >> we didn't invest in our roads and brinls and schools the way we should have. >> we had a trillion dollar stimulus plan. >> only a small portion went to infrastructure, to investments -- what seeing say -- my dad was in construction, one of the hardest-hit industries in the 2008 recession. if you put construction to work, for somebody has to go to lunch. it's a ripple effect. >> we had 900 billion, we blew
10:12 am
that chance and now trust secretary clinton -- >> that many jobs isn't blowing it. >> a lot aren't very good. >> only in the world of grinch and republicans would creating 15 million jobs after george bush left us with an economy hemorrhagic. >> you campaign on things are good enough. we'll campaign on things can get better. we'll see who wins the general election. we have a bit of time left, and i want to get to isis, the external threat. here's what clinton and trump are saying about each other. >> it was hillary clinton that she should get an award from them as the founder of isis. >> there is no doubt in myomind that donald trump is unqualified to be president and unfit to be commander in chief. >> congressman becerra, briefly, what is clinton's plans? i don't understand either plan, what is clinton's plan to destroy isis and why is it
10:13 am
better than donald trump's? >> just as she was there to green light -- >> she didn't green light it, president obama did. >> but she was there to give advice. she was the one that assembled a coalition that helped stop the nuclear buildup in iran. >> what's her plan to stop isis? >> she's made it very clear. you get tough on them at the source, we protect the homeland. >> what you don't do is you don't call for torture to be used by the newest military. you don't cozy up to people like piatten and it saddam hussein. you don't use nuclear weapons. you create the partnerships that you need. you don't go out there and show that you're unfit to be president the way donald trump has. >> so 15 years after 9/11, we're not winning. we're not winning in afghanistan. we're not winning in iraq, we're not winning in syria, we're not kinning in libya, we're not winning in lebanon. >> that's a knock on our troops.
10:14 am
>> no. our troops will tell you we're not winning. >> even -- >> wait a second. >> he attacked a gold star family. what's winning about that. >> he defenses a number of gold star families. >> he went after the mother. >> and mr. khan attacked him pretty tough, too. politics is a tough business. but -- but. >> get out kitchen if you can't take the heath. >> for both of them. hillary's got a run on the grounds that disrupting libya, disrupting syria, failing in russia, failing in iraq, failing in afghanistan -- and she'll do more of the same failure including paying $400 billion in cash, which the president assures us was not in fact -- >> $400 million. we'll be talking about that. that's a good way to get you two off the set. speaker ging rich, congressman becerra, thank you both. i hope when they have the big
10:15 am
debate, that both candidates do as well as you do. new polls that tracks changing shape of this race. back in a moment.
10:16 am
10:17 am
if you are repeatedly having to say in very strong terms that what he has said is
10:18 am
unacceptable, why are you still endorsing him? >> people ask me, what do you think about trump? honestly i don't care for him much, and i certainly don't trust hillary. president obama calling out republicans for supporting trump and gop congressman mike kauffman of colorado coming out against trump in a commercial as part of his campaign for reelection. and syndicated columnist george will. gerald seib, lisa lerer, and lisa boothe. jerry, how damaging was it for donald trump? and was it irreparable? >> very damaging, but not irreparable, i don't think. i think the numbers that scared republicans moth wasn't the that could fa hillary clinton was up by eight, nine, ten points, but we had a number which kind of congress, one controlled by republicans president now
10:19 am
democrats are up by four points. i think what changed is republicans looked at the trump campaign and said it's in trouble, but it's the kind of trouble that can drag us down and now we're seeing a separation of the party, a presidential campaign going one way and congressional campaigns going that way. we saw the long and winding route that he went to finally endorse paul ryan, john mccain and kelly ayotte. we saw that ad beginning it by saying he doesn't like donald trump. how much trump is trouble in with his own party? >> it presents challenges. it's not good when your own party is coming out with ads distancing themselves from you, but i think some of the disasters could potentially be the best thing that could have happened to him. sometimes candidates need to get
10:20 am
their teeth knocked in to force directional changes that are needed for the campaign that are bivl. what we saw is donald trump sourcing paul ryan, senator mccain and ayotte as well, which is a recognition hi needs the republican party, the republican base. he's hired cambridge analytics despite in may say his does not need analytics, the firm behind brexit who identified first-time voters and got them out to vote. that's a positive step. we also saw he out-raised hillary clinton in direct donations, a 69% increase in small-dollar donations, which is a positive step for his campaign. also after getting hid with $234 million in radio and tv buys by clinton and her allies there's report that his campaign is finally looking into ad time for this election. maybe it was a bad couple weeks,
10:21 am
but perhaps this is the sort of forced change that his campaign needs. >> then we have hillary clinton who by all accounts had a very strong week until as we saw on friday she once again kicked up the controversy over her private e-mails and what fbi director comey said about them, and last night donald trump had some fun with how she explained it. here trump is. >> unstable hillary clinton, i think that the people of this country don't want somebody that's going to short-circuit up here. >> george, how do you explain hillary clinton and her continuing troubles with the e-mails? >> well, there's no good explanation, which is why they throw a lot of dust in the air. the old saying, if you have the facts law on the side, argue the law. if you have the facts on your side, argument the facts.
10:22 am
if neither are on your side, pound the table. she's pounding the table at the moment. people have made many their mind for or against her, and i have a doubt as to whether this resonates when people go into the voting booth in november. >> why? >> because it's already baked in the numbers in your poll, which is they said not honest and trust worthy that's largely, not exclusively, but largely related to this, and they have made up their minds. >> so, in other words, if you're against her, you already -- whatever your feelings are, you have already baked the private e-mails into it. >> it's unclear how many undecided voters are in the country, but surely those who were undecided are not undecided about this. people have probably said weerp for her in spite of that. if we're opposed to her, it's because of that, but they have factored it in. >> lisa, how much frustration at clinton headquarters in brooklyn
10:23 am
the fact that she just -- even though politically or rather legally she's in the clear, the fbi director comey and attorney general lynch say they're not going to prosecute her, accomplicically she can't seem to get arrive of it. and surprising twist, that campaign folks at clinton campaign great with george, that this is a rorschach test. if you see this and don't like her, you like her less, but if if you like her, you see this and think there's a conspiracy theory against her. a campaign is not a court case, public opinion is not a jury. she's unable to provide anything but these very legalistic answers and continues to be a drag on her campaign. look, none of that may matter. donald trump is having problems that may surpass voters' views, but it is something that could follow her into the white house should she win. it's hard to get thing done when
10:24 am
voters don't trust you, and this speaks to that weakness of hers. >> let's look at swing state polls that came out this week. they were pri alarming. trump is now done 15 points in new hampshire, down 11 points in pennsylvania, down nine points in michigan, and down six points in florida. jerry, there's even a poll that shows trump is down four points in reliably red georgia. this is trouble. >> and utah, it's drifting the other way. the number that ought to bother the trump campaign is florida. for me it's hard to put together the electoral college map that wins for trump without florida. the fact he's down there is a bad sign. if he doesn't win florida, it doesn't matter if he wins pennsylvania. if he doesn't win florida, he's not going to win pennsylvania. these are all leading indicators. when you step back from the numbers, one of the things you see is in the last week
10:25 am
hillary clinton and the democrats consolidated their base in the wake of their convention. the republicans went in the opposite direction. donald trump is bleeding right now among some of his core supporters, white males, noncollege educated voters. these are people who are the trump voters. that's where he's eroded. that may be the place where it's easier for him to recover. >> i want to ask you, lisa, about -- something something that surprised me the most between gingrich and becerra, that becerra representing clinton went after donald trump's wife and her immigration status. were you surprised by that? >> no, i think this is something that the clinton campaign is starretting in attack. we've seen articles questioning her immigration status, and if their line of attack proves to be true that is a very damaging line of attack against donald trump who has made immigration sort of the central point of his campaign.
10:26 am
clearly if there's enough information there that's going to be devastating for his campaign, so i think it's incumbent upon the donald trump campaign to prove them wrong and put that information out there. >> we should point out that her maiden name, came to this country long before she got involved with donald trump. is this a new line of attack from the clinton campaign? >> their gold is to make voters not who he says he is, that he plays by different rules in his own life than he would as president and his policies. you see that also with his attacks in outsourcing. hillary clinton has spent the last week slamming him for making his products overseas and moves jobs for bangladesh, china and all these places, so they're trying to do what campaigns do in this stage in the presidential rae, which is to undercut his nair tough. george, final thoughts on melania's status?
10:27 am
>> they also may be trying to provoke him. he is provokable. when he is provoked, he goes on twitter and says interesting things that take up another two or three days. we're less than 90 days away from the election. we're not talking about 1.2% of economic growth. we're not talking about things that might embarrass mrs. clinton, something that might detonate an easily detonated candidate. we have to take a break. we'll see you all a bit later. questions about the it is cash payment to iran. we'll ask senator tom cotton, was it ransom to free four u.s. hostages? and power plants account for more than a third of energy-related carbon emissions. the challenge is to capture the emissions before they're released into the atmosphere. exxonmobil is a leader in carbon capture. our team is working to make this technology better,
10:28 am
more affordable so it can reduce emissions around the world. that's what we're working on right now. ♪ energy lives here. coming up, trump and clinton on the iran payment. >> who could approve something like that, where they take cash into a country and hand it to them? >> the white house has addressed
10:29 am
10:30 am
10:31 am
a look outside the belt way at martha's vineyard where president obama is spending his final summer vacation as commander in chief. now to the $400 million cash payment to iran, which the administration maintains was not ransom, even though the exchange coincided with tehran's release of those four american hostages. let's bring in senator tom cotton a member of the armed services committee and fierce critic of president obama's nuclear deal. senator, we've known since the formal announcement of the iran deal last january and release of the four american hostages that the u.s. would pay iran $4.7 million as settlement of a old
10:32 am
arms deal. so why are you upset about this cash payment to iran this week? >> chris, good to be on with you this morning. at the time i had that 1.7 billion was a ransom itself, but the administration has consistently stonewalled congress and the american people. we don't know the cash payments, for instance. we don't know it was paid for with bills that could easily be laundered and used for terrorism or support of iran's allies, and we didn't know the department of injures opposed it. i think it's shocking to americans that the government was working likal drug cartel, stacking cash on pallets and flying it an airport. and the obama administration continuing to stonecall on this. >> let me quickly point out, if people are wondering, you're on the cotton family farm in arkansas. i must say it looks like a very
10:33 am
nice place to be on this sunday. president oba president obama didn't keep it a secret. he announced last january we were giving this money to iran. let's look back at what he said. >> iran and united states are now settled a long-standing iranian government claim against the united states government. iran will be returned its own funds, including appropriate interest, but much less than the amount iran sought. >> now, i understand the point you made in your first answer. we're talking about $400 million in cash, ahn unmarked plane, we're talking about the hostages waiting on the tarmac until the plane landed, but you certainly would agree that the administration did not keep this payment, maybe the nature of it, but they didn't keep the payment secret. >> well, they didn't keep the nature of it. when you get $400 million in straight cash in 500 euro notes, a note notoriously used to
10:34 am
terrorism around the world so much so that the european union is taking it out of circulation, i think that's an important fact for the american people to know. at the time, i said paying -- not money that they deserved or had the right to on the very weekend that four americans were released ashes and the nuclear deal was implemented, that was a ransom payment and would lead to more hostages in iran. >> former bush attorney general michael lieu casey, also a former federal judge, had an article this week in "wall street journal" under the headline -- legal but not right. do you agree that whether you like it or not the payment was legal? and what do you plan to do about it to stop this thing? you can't undo it, but to try to stop it in the future. >> lawyers disagree about the legality, but in the end it's not a question whether it was
10:35 am
legal, but whether it was mart and the right thing to do to keep americans safe. again, president obama said we don't pay ransom this week. he said this was not a ransom. it doesn't matter what the president said, but is the matters what terrorists around the world think, and they clearly think it was a ransom. if they take a american hostage, may they too will get a windfall of $400 million. bev to stands up to iran, chris. i've introduced legislation with several calling the counter-iranian threat act, that we need to act immediately after we go back in session -- >> i want to get to the larger question of iran. one of the concern is iran used this as, to support terrorism, but cia director john brennan said that that's not true.
10:36 am
let's listen to director bren n brennan. >> the money, the revenue flowing into iran is being used to support its currency, to provide, you know, monies to the department and agencies to build up infrastructure. >> is director brennan misleading the american people, senator? >> well, when you give iran more than $100 billion, there's no doubt some of that money may go into domestic purposes. a lot of the support for terrorism groups like hezbollah may not require that much money. even white house officials have said that some of this money likely ended up in the hands of terrorist organizations or revolutionary guard corps, as president obama's director of and commander in the middle east have said, iran's behavior has gotten worse since the nuclear deal, it's not gotten any better. >> you opposed the iran nuclear deal from the start. at the time it was announced, the general assessment was that
10:37 am
iran was weeks at the most, months away from breakout at the time it could is assemble terr yell to create a nuclear bam. the breakout period has been brought back. isn't that a good thing? >> chris, the nuclear deal is still a failure. the fundamental objection was newt iran would break the deal, but uphold the terms and they would still be on the path to a nuclear weapon, because we allowed them to keep a vast is nuclear infrastructure. it only took north korea 12 years from the timew signed a deal to detonate a weapon. many have said iran could walk away from the deal, because iran is violating the terms of the deal. germany's intelligence service said they have examined their clan death inprocurement network to try to -- they continue to test ballistic missiles in violation of associated u.n.
10:38 am
security council resolution, so iran is not upholding its end of the deal, but even if they were, the deal would still by fundamentally still flawed, bay it allows them to keep the vast nuclear structure. given the enact that hillary clinton stepped down as secretary of state three years before any of this happened, is that fair? >> well, hillary clinton was the architect of barack obama's foreign policy in the first term and much of the groundwork for the negotiations that ultimately culminated in this deal did in fact begin unhillary clinton. >> but you have to agree that she had nothing to do with the actual payment. >> the deciding to makes this payment like all decisions in the end rests at the feet of barack obama. he's the president of the united states. it's his job to keep our country safe. to pay a ransom i think clearly will not keep americans safe,
10:39 am
especially when you see what's happened in iran since we made that payment. you've been quiet about donald trump beyoirnd saying you support him. given his fight with the khan family, given his comments about russia, that he's raised the policy that we wouldn't come to the aid of sure our nato allies, how do you feel about donald trump's readiness to be commander? chief? >> chris, i've had my disagreements with donald trump, i've stated them clearly in the past and will in the future, he ought not to have said some of what he said, but hillary clinton ought not to have done the things she did. she was bon for the death of four in benghazi. she set up an unclassified server, and then she lied about it for a year. just last week on your show, chris, she's lying about lying. all week been telling lie being her lies. donald trump ought not to have
10:40 am
said some things, but hillary clinton ought not to have so much so many things. are you confidence that donald trump is ready to be commander in chief? >> i am confident if if the american people elect donald trump as president, that this country will be safer in the world, our streets will be safer, and we will be more prosperous. >> senator cotton, thank you, thanks for joining us, enjoy the rest of your family on the family farm in arkansas. >> thanks, chris. up next we'll bring back our sunday panel to get their take on the $400 million payment for iran and how it will play on the campaign trail. plus what would you like to ask the panel about the timing of the payment to iran? coincidental or cash for american capitaling? just go to it "fox news sunday" on twit we may ask your questio.
10:41 am
10:42 am
10:43 am
10:44 am
we have just learned about the $400 million ransom pate, just a coincident, right? cash, care. >> we didn't pay a random. we didn't here and we won't in the future, precisely because if we did, we would encourage americans to be targeted. president obama and donald trump sharply at odds over the revelation of the cash payment to iran last january. we're back with a panel. george, when is $400 million in cash flown in in an unmarked cargo plane with four american hostages sitting and waiting on the tarmac, when is that ransom? and when is that a koirns dense? >> to use the term du jour, the optics are not good. senator cotton said the whole $400 million was ransom, so he
10:45 am
believes no legal claim is valid, derives from a shah era deal that was never consummated. there was a difference between what looks scandalous than a scandal. >> the cash makes it look terrible. the only reason to make it cash is untraceable. they could have done it without the plane or the pallets -- >> wait a minute. the president says the reason they had to do cash is because we have all these banking restrictions and sanctions. if we had tried to do it through a wire, they couldn't have gotten it. >> it seems they could have digitally bounced it off of somewhere. this is a way of einvestigating the letter of the law and they could have evaded it in some other way, truck she in passing strange is director brennan saying we're using this for infrastructure. money is fungible. you give a nation $400 million.
10:46 am
>> they have given them over 100 billion. >> sure. that's money they can use for something else. >> we asked you for questions for the panel, and we got a bunch like this one. don james tweets -- can there be any legal repercussions against potus for ordering what is obviously ransom? jerry, how do you answer john? >> the nub of the matter is, is this iran's money or american money? in the view of the administration and most lawyers, this is iran's money. it goes back to a 1979 deal in which the iranians bought under the shah some fighter jets that were never deliver. the rest is supposed to be interest that's been sitting in escrow ever since. if not taxpayer money it's hard to see the resource. if it is taxpayer money, you
10:47 am
have a different situation. i think the issue is not so much the payment, as you noted the president announced, it's the manner and timing of the payment. underneath all of that is a much bigger issue. part of this effort to clear the decks with the iranians, the nuclear deal, the americans held hostage and this money, will that produce some change in iranian behavior? or is this simply a case in which they'll pocket what they have and move on to the next, attempt to get more out of it? that's the real question that hangs in the air here. lisa lerer, what makes it harder for the op 'bama administration to argue, one of the pastors who was a hostage said they were sitting on the plane waiting to leave after years of capital activity, for hours while they were told that they were waiting for another plane to arrive. here is the pastor. >> everyone was ready we are to leave, and we are wait fog that
10:48 am
plane. until that plane comes, we are not let go. >> how worried is the campaign that this washes up on hillary clinton and her stewardship with obama and it becomes a campaign issue. >> frankly it's not something that they talked about in the last week. she dismissed it as old news saying it was publicly announced and she supportive of the nuclear deal and thinks that's the right approach. i think when you talk to clinton advisers privately, they see this underscores how donald trump is really not fit to be commander in chief. they point out several things that happened, which is essentially he made up facts. there was no video, as he later admitted. hillary clinton he sort of blamed her for the whole negotiation, that's not quite true. she was out of the state department for 18 months. at george points out this is a case that dates back to the '70s. of course he claims to have seen
10:49 am
these payments happening that and he claimed it was secret. it wasn't secret. it was announced on january 17th. >> not the $400 million in the unmarked cargo plane. >> right, but the fact this settlement had been reached. so advisers are really focusing on that, that he made up facts. they had some basis for that. the post did an analysis of hi his description of the video, and he said nine untruffle things in 300 words. that's what they're focusing on. the interesting thing about that, lisa is just after trumped seemed for one of the rare times to walk back and say no, i didn't see video of the cash arriving in tehran, i saw the hostages get off a plane when they were freed from iran, there was an iranian documentary which seemed to show cash coming off pallets off a plane, so maybe there was a video, though trump apparently didn't see it. >> i don't think he did a good job explaining that clearly, but
10:50 am
look toe senator tom cotton's point he was pointing out it doesn't what the administration is saying or what they believe to be truffle, it's the perception of iranians and other bad actors in the country. that's the problem. you look at their own military saying it was a ransom deal and pointing at the weakness of the obama administration as a result. i think what this does is regardless of what the details are, the perception of it is a ransom deal. thinkty continues to undermine an embarrassing sequence of events since the implementation of this deal. two weeks after the deal iran put ten u.s. sailors on their knees, pointed guns at their head and shot a video and used that as propaganda. in march after the deal, iran shot their third ballistic missiles that flies in the face of international law. in april the u.s. made the unprecedented purchase of heavy water for nuclear purposes. you go to june and may where we had ben rhodes admitted to lying
10:51 am
about the deal, deceiving the american public. as in june the obama administration doctoring video trying to give the illulgs that they didn't lie about the deal, and we also have in june the state department once again declared that iran is the world's largest state-sponsored of terrorism. one embarrassment after another which undercuts the deal, undercuts the obama administration on foreign policy as well as hillary clinton. i think you bring up a good point. jerry, forget the deal, we're going to forget about the $400 million over the next couple months, but the whole question of engaging iran and hillary clinton was clearly an architect of that under the order of barack obama, that is a legitimate issue in this campaign. how do you expect that to play? and you know, you have iran continuing to be a bad actor, also have them further away from the nuclear weapon from the from
10:52 am
when the deal started. >> this is the 10,000-foot question, or clearly relations with iran is at an inflection point. the question is, does engagement produce over ten years a different kind of iran or simply produce the same kind of iran, just simply with more money in its pocket. >> hillary clinton is going to argue one and donald trump will argue another. what we're seeing now of in the bad behavior, is not a tip cape reaction by the hardliners, and said it's a last gasp of the hardline? or is it a sign that nothing has changed and nothing will ever change? >> who has the better sigh of this argument. it's going to be over the next 30 months, because that's when voters will have to make their judgment. >> the problem is there's overlap with the electoral cycle and the cycle of policy. it's akin to the policy in the
10:53 am
cold war, we're going to hold the line and wait for internal regime change. it did work. the regime disappeared. we're wagering now a very different kind of regime, a theocratic regime can be as pliable and changeable as the soviet union. that's a big wager, and we won't know the answer. >> but in 15 seconds, are voters going to take the critics' view of this or the clinton/obama view? >> i don't think it will matter a lot until there's an event. if there's a terrorist event here or abroad, that the change thes campaign dramatic will. next week washington's golden girl looking to make history in rio. a look ario's sugarloaf
10:54 am
10:55 am
mountain, and all eyes are on a swimmer who has since become american's sweetheart. here is our "power player of the week." >> wake up at 4:15, practice from 5 to 6:30, go to school. >> katie ledecky is discussing her scud. she has no thoughts of slowing
10:56 am
down. >> is that effort too much? >> no, i've gotten used to it. i think the swimming has helped my schoolwork. schoolwork and school day always helps my swimming. it goes bo ways, i guess. >> it certainly seems to be working. what world records do you hold? >> 400 free, 800 free and 15 hundred dollars frees. she had just started her senior year at a private high school outside washington. >> how stuff is it to be a normal teenager? >> it's not tough at all. it's been a lot of fun the past couple years, swimming and going to school. >> is there any time for boys? >> no, i don't have a boyfriend and never have. >> katie started swinging competitively at 6. her enthusiasm stronger than her form. by the time she was 8, she was starting to win.
10:57 am
>> you can improve that time and that's a result of what you do every day in practice. i think you can see the correlation. >> numbers don't lie. >> exactly. numbers don't lie, and they show what you do in practice. i like that aspect of it. >> in 2012 at age 15, she made the olympic team, but she was no favorite. >> i would have been happy if i got first or last. i was just grateful to be at the olympics. i didn't have many expectations for myself. >> and what happened? >> i won. it was a threat night. this is the 2012 olympic goal in the 800. >> may i? it is gorgeous, isn't it? >> yeah. it's a nice keepsake. >> the keepsake got some company in 2014, five more gold medals from another competition. now katie is back in training focusing on the olympics. >> i think it's more of time
10:58 am
goals rather than i have to make this meet or have to get these medals. >> if you met your time goal and finished third, would you be happy or disappointed? >> i would be happy. you can't control what other people will do. i try to set my time goals to put me up there, put me in contention for a medal. >> but ledecky's gold rush will have to wait. she anchored the u.s. team in a relay last night that won silver. she's scheduled to swim in three individual events and one more relace, and she's favored for gold in all of them. now this program note, be sure to tune to fox news chas at 10:00 p.m. eastern for fox news reporting zika anchored by trace gallagher. that's it for today. have a good week, and we'll l l
10:59 am
11:00 am
>> announcer: this program is a paid presentation for omega xl and is brought to you by great healthworks. ♪ on this episode of "larry king reports," we'll discuss the benefits of omega-3s in fighting chronic inflammation. we'll meet ken meares, the c.e.o. of great healthworks and creator of omega xl, and sharon mcquillan, m.d., an expert in clinical studies and research. we will learn about omega xl and how it can help to reduce joint pain and improve mobility on "larry king reports." >> welcome. i'm larry king, and i'm here today to report on a significant health-related investigation that's been taking place for the past couple of years.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on